Book Reviews

Educational Freedom in an Age of Anxiety . Twelfth Yearbook of the John Dewey Society, ed.
Freedom, Power, and democratic Planning . By K. Mannheim, Internat. Lib. of Sociol. & Soc. Reconstr.
Improving Teaching-Learning Processes . By Ray H. Simpson.     

The effect of modifiers on the stability of a vinyl acetate/ethylene copolymer dispersion

This paper examines the effect of modifiers on the stability of a vinyl acetate/ethylene copolymer dispersion adhesive upon aging. Eighteen common modifiers were added to a well-characterized vinyl acetate/ethylene copolymer dispersion (Dur-O-Set^® E-150) in known concentrations and dry-film samples were subjected to 16–17 years of dark aging and seven to eight years of light aging. Yellowing, pH, gloss, swelling, cohesive strength, and flexibility were monitored for changes upon aging. Generally, the neat Dur-O-Set^® E-150 (no additives) was found to become acidic on aging, but was fairly resistant to yellowing. It also swelled substantially in toluene, was of high gloss, medium strength, and flexible, and remained so on aging. No modifier was found to improve these properties. Various solvents, wetting agents, and thickeners did not alter the properties by much, while plasticizers, freeze-thaw stabilizer, glycerin, and certain fillers had a more negative effect.     

Dialogue in conservation decision-making

An analysis of the impact of stakeholder consultation during the conservation decision-making processes is presented. Defining and finding opportunities for stakeholder communication within conservation work is an ethical necessity when working with cultural heritage, but the limits and practice of this necessity are less clear. Case studies are used to explore which aspects of the conservation process stakeholders are most likely to be consulted about, and reviews the impact of their views. It asks whether conservators have a preference in which decisions they are prepared to share with stakeholders across three aspects of conservation: the initial appraisal, treatment and the display or storage. Where consultation relates to treatment, conservators are more likely to fall back on their own technical authority except when those consulted are regarded as fellow professionals. Other categories of stakeholder such as artists, originating communities, and religious groups were found to be more constructively consulted on the understanding of the object and on care related to display and storage. Conservators should be offered more explicit guidance on the ethics of consultation, the aspects of consultation that they should engage with and on the ethical ways to deal with conflict arising from consultation.     

Effective preservation decision strategies

Decisions about preservation issues are made both deliberatively and unconsciously. Heuristics operate as intuitive processes which are rapid and can be reliable and effective. Deliberative decisions require time to complete and can be described by an analytic-deliberative model. The characteristics of these two processes and their relevance to preventive conservation decision-making are discussed. Each of these two processes has its strengths and weaknesses. People naturally make decisions and utilise a range of strategies without necessarily having insights into the process. This paper provides a frame to help examine, describe, and reflect upon our own and others’ decision-making in order to improve both processes and outcomes.     

Access to human,animal, and environmental journals is still limited for the One Health community

Objective

“One Health” is an interdisciplinary approach to evaluating and managing the health and well-being of humans, animals, and the environments they share that relies on knowledge from the domains of human health, animal health, and the environmental sciences. The authors'' objective was to evaluate the extent of open access (OA) to journal articles in a sample of literature from these domains. We hypothesized that OA to articles in human health or environmental journals was greater than access to animal health literature.

Methods

A One Health seminar series provided fifteen topics. One librarian translated each topic into a search strategy and searched four databases for articles from 2011 to 2012. Two independent investigators assigned each article to human health, the environment, animal health, all, other, or combined categories. Article and journal-level OA were determined. Each journal was also assigned a subject category and its indexing evaluated.

Results

Searches retrieved 2,651 unique articles from 1,138 journals; 1,919 (72%) articles came from 406 journals that contributed more than 1 article. Seventy-seven (7%) journals dealt with all 3 One Health domains; the remaining journals represented human health 487 (43%), environment 172 (15%), animal health 141 (12%), and other/combined categories 261 (23%). The proportion of OA journals in animal health (40%) differed significantly from journals categorized as human (28%), environment (28%), and more than 1 category (29%). The proportion of OA for articles by subject categories ranged from 25%–34%; only the difference between human (34%) and environment (25%) was significant.

Conclusions

OA to human health literature is more comparable to animal health than hypothesized. Environmental journals had less OA than anticipated.Keywords (Medical Subject Headings) Publishing, Periodicals as Topic, Access to Information, Veterinary Medicine, Environment, Environmental Health, Medicine“One Health” is an integrated, transdisciplinary approach to solve complex problems at the diverse interfaces shared by humans, animals, and the environment [1]. The One Health approach to evaluating and managing the health and well-being of humans, animals, and the environments that they share relies on knowledge from the domains of human health, animal health, and the environmental sciences. Although there is a growing body of literature about the development of the One Health concept as documented by Pepper, Carrigan, Shurtz, and Foster [2], this literature is not the same as the combination of literature from the three domains that is applied in service of One Health. Every discipline related to One Health has its unique mindset and language, with corresponding lists of acronyms that are frequently an impediment to effective communication across the participating professions. Relevant papers guiding a One Health approach may never specifically use “One Health” as a term or concept.To promote better communication and collaboration among health professionals and environmental scientists, a public monthly One Health Intellectual Exchange Group (IEG) hosted by the North Carolina Biotechnology Center was launched in 2009. In 2011, faculty from the North Carolina State University College of Veterinary Medicine, University of North Carolina''s Gillings School for Global Public Health, Duke Global Health Institute, and Nicholas School of the Environment at Duke University expanded the IEG series into a weekly seminar course with eight One Health focus areas [3]. The eight focus area modules were the following: an introduction to One Health; environmental health and ecology; the human and animal bond; zoonoses and emerging infectious diseases; food and water safety; disease surveillance, informatics, and disaster preparedness; benefits of comparative medicine; and policy and education (Appendix A, online only). Each seminar speaker recommended papers to read prior to the session to provide a foundation for the topic because student backgrounds and majors were quite diverse. Represented student majors included master''s of public health, master''s of animal science, doctor of veterinary medicine, graduate-level environmental sciences, and undergraduate-level biochemistry, engineering, and biology.Open access (OA) to relevant literature is very important to scholars and practitioners working on interdisciplinary problems. The One Health Proof of Concept Workgroup found that few studies assess outcomes in human, animal, and environmental spheres simultaneously [4], making it important to be able to access articles from each of the three domains to get a more complete picture.The objective of this study was to evaluate the extent of OA to journal articles in a sample of literature relevant to One Health from the human, animal, and environmental domains. Working in a college of veterinary medicine and supporting faculty, staff, and students addressing interdisciplinary problems under the One Health umbrella [5], the authors were familiar with the extent of OA in human biomedical and public health literature and the literature of veterinary medicine but were less familiar with environmental journals. In light of general availability of environmental information and OA to publications such as Environmental Health Perspectives, we thought it likely that environmental literature would be relatively open compared to the other subject areas. Therefore, we hypothesized OA to articles from human health or environmental journals was greater than access to animal health literature. We chose to look at article-level subject categorization and access, as well as journal-level categorization and access, because they might differ. Article-level access relates more to authors'' decisions about OA for a content domain, while journal-level access and subject categorization are driven by publishers and associations. Understanding the distinction and having data would inform our efforts to promote increased OA to this literature.